I know some of us be may be suffering from tournament overload at the moment, what with the NC and multiplayer tournaments running concurrently, and with Qorlas's Masters not too far away for the lucky few who make his Top 16 (not me!). Not to mention the Wildfire's World League about to recommence.

However, I have been considering a tournament of an alternate format for a while, one with a few new ideas, and though it's probably not the best time to ask people both their opinions on my concept, nor whether it appeals to them, I still thought I'd put it out to the masses to request your thoughts and opinions.

I'm not going to give you the intricacies of it all; if this ever gets off the ground, I expect rules etc. to be changed or tweaked prior to commencement. I will, though, share enough of my thoughts to give you the flavour of what I'd like to achieve.

The final part of my preamble is a few of reasons for my chosen format.
1). 2P US is the most highly/regularly played. My tournament will use this and no other map/number of players. Sorry if this already puts you off. Thanks for reading.
2). I really, really enjoy the camaraderie of a team game. Currently only the NC has this (I might be wrong). My tournament will be team play like the NC.
3). The starting player button added this year has given me a couple of ideas about giving players certain starting privileges. I'd like to try to incorporate it into a tournament. My tournament does this, sort of.

And with that done, here's what I've been considering.

A multi-national team competition comprising an initial league format (with home and away legs (see below)), followed by 2-leg knockout Quarter and Semi-Finals, and ending with a single-leg Final. Think of it akin to the UEFA Champions League in football (sorry US guys - my knowledge of US sports tournaments is woeful). It could last no more than 9-10 weeks, but could feasibly fit into only 4 weeks.

Teams
- Each team would comprise 4 players (a squad) of which only 3 would play in any one leg/round
- Every member of the team must be of a different nationality - this is a major component of my tournament and one which I don't think is replicated any where else (aside from NC transnational teams). Again, I may be wrong
- Each team would be seeded based upon the average ELO of their top 3 players
- Each team will be limited in their average/aggregate ELO of the top 3 players. This will help spread the best players around, as well as preventing an all-domineering team/squad. Decision to take ELO snapshot will be taken nearer the tournament commencement.

Leagues (aka Round Robin)
- Each league would comprise 4 teams
- The top 25% ranked of teams would be placed in different leagues (groups)
- The next 25% ranked would be randomly placed into one of these leagues (I have a method by which the randomisation process could be carried out in the lobby - spectators would be welcome)
- The next 25% placed as above, and so with the final 25% of teams. Again European football fans, this mirrors the Champions League drawing system, without the need to consider similar nationalities.
- There will be six matches per League, with each team playing the other teams twice - a home leg and an away leg
- Each match will consist of 3 matchups, 3 games (not Bo3), ties included. Possible matchup scores: 3-0, 2-1, 1-2, 0-3 (all without ties); 2-0, 0-2, 1-1 (all with 1 possible tie); 1-0, 0-1 (with 2 unlikely ties) or the extremely unlikely 0-0 with 3 ties
- Upon completion of each league, the top 2 teams would progress to the knockout rounds. Dependant upon the number of teams and leagues, the first knockout round may or may not be the Quarter Finals

Knockout rounds
- As per the league, these would comprise 2 legs, one home and one away
- Best aggregate score (and certain tie breakers) to decide the winner who progresses
You can guess the rest up to the Final

Home and Away Legs
So, as I said, I'd like to make use of the starting button, and the (small? big?) advantage it gives to the starting player.
- For the team's home leg, every home player starts the odd numbered games thus giving whatever advantage there is in starting to that player. The home player will start 2 of the 3 games.
- Therefore, the away team's players will start the even numbered game (game 2).
- With 6 league matches per teams, the fact teams play each other both home and away, and matches of only 3 games, this not only allows a greater opportunity for upsets, especially when lower ranked teams host higher ranked teams, but gives enough time for advantages to even out. I hope.

A lot of the other organisation stuff will be comparable to the NC and other tournaments.

Right, this post is already too long. And a waste of my lunch hour if nobody thinks this tournament format has any merit. If so, the post can quietly sink to the bottom and never be seen of again. Hopefully, however, some of you out there might think it's a fair idea, or indeed could recommend to me other things which would improve it.

Finally, I'll say it now in the hope that we can squeeze this format somewhere into the busy tournament schedule in 2010, I'd want to both play and administer in some capacity. Like Wildfire does with the World League.

Go for it, folks. Tell me what you think. I can take criticism! Thanks for your time reading.

5 rather than 3 is fine with me. 3 might lend itself to more upsets, which could be good for the game. More people will perceive they have a chance against the topmost tops. It'd make the tops play even more carefully.

Did I forget to mention that there'll be a upper limit to the ELO aggregation? Oops, yes I did. I must edit it above, but I don't want a single team with the best of each country. Let's make it fun to form a squad with a specific ELO target level.

For me (too) the most appealing part of NC is the team idea, so i really like that aspect of it.
I wouldn't make the matches too long, so BO3 or at most BO5 is okay.
As far as space on the calendar -if there is any left at all - i would suggest somewhere halfway across the year from NC.

Last but not least, for this competition, if it gets to that stage, i would of course play as an Irishman

One more comment now for stemayf:
I understand your wish to avoid a top-of-tops team.
But ELO doesn't do this job, Miguel just answered, why.

In fact I think that nothing will do this job in a way that is perceived fair by everyone (or anyone? ).
So I suggest to forget about it.
Let the players find their teams as they like it.
Does it harm NC that we have a team consisting of only #1 players? Not really.
Is it possible to beat this team? Well, one can always hope - for some it would have been ...

With only 4 players per team we will end up with 10 teams who consider themselves to be the best 4 players around anyhow.

If you like the idea of a 'fantasy team' situation where each team has some skill level similarities, why not institute a draft?

Get all interested to sign up with intended national affiliation.

the number of applicants will suggest the number of teams.

Pick the nation with the number of players closest to the number of teams desired and make those players the selection captains? Or allow captain volunteers. I shy away from the former a little because some players may not be aware of skill levels as some others might be. But, that may also be some of the fun of it. The rest of you know better than I with regards to this.

In any event, these captains then pick their team from the pool of available players as one might in a fantasy draft.

Maybe assign teams according to the first letter of the nick - I really like the "D"-collection

Jokes aside - we are all after the team spirit, and I guess you'll have the best team spirit if you can pick your team as you like it without restrictions.
I think, without restrictions we will end up with some very good teams but no invincible team (in fact I really wouldn't know which 4 players to pick in order to create such a team).
If we really want/need to have restrictions, don't use ELO (no matter at which time you fix the list, it's always flawed) but find something else - I think Angel was/is working on some overall tournament stats, maybe that's better.

Sure, we can put it to a poll, stemayf.

Maybe we should take another poll first:
"which 4 players from different countries are your all-star-team"?
Let's see, how many different answers we get, and what the ELO rating of the named stars is at the moment and was at start of NC.
(If there is a clear majority for some players, and if those players have or had the highest rating, I'm convinced )

As I ask for that I should probably name one myself - as mentioned above, not clear for me at all - so out of tons of variants I pick (in alphabetical order)
Daedin (Spain)
Deveric (France)
Patterson (Netherlands)
White Train (Germany)
Sorry to all others who were in my mind but didn't make it to the keyboard

First, I love the idea of team format for tournaments. I enjoy getting to know other players more which a team format does.
Second, Time frame is probably the biggest concern. I agree with Mr. Bean and Qorlas: Mid-Jan to March, 1/2 year away from NC. Also, that means wintertime play, which is good given the weather where most of us live.

Perhaps I am unclear on this set-up as far as number of players. Is there a limit on number of teams?
Do you have a plan for format if number of teams does not divide evenly by 4 teams per league? It seems you are looking for 16 teams, is that right, and would that be the limit?

My .02$: It seems to me that the 'parity' objective put forward by stemayf is broader than just about knowledge of the eventual winner (stemayf, correct me if I am wrong). If the point is to stimulate 'league' competition by having possible upsets in every round/match, letting everyone organize teams without restrictions of any kind (such as ELO) will likely lead to a few (5-6?) very good teams, and a larger pool (15-20 teams) of clearly inferior teams. Think NC without the nationality restrictions -- you wouldn't know who will win, but you'd know who's going to be in the QF's (such as in this year's NC, where 7 of the 8 top ELO teams made it to the NC QF's). The ELO manipulation problem is of course a concern then.

That's why I really like gff's suggestion about holding a fantasy draft -- I don't know how European sports (fantasy) drafting works so let me know what I think he means from a North American perspective. Suppose 80 players want to participate (basically half the number of players in this year's NC), that's 20 teams. Get a list of 20 willing captains, then hold a 3-round (for 4-player teams) fantasy draft with a random snake order (snake = team that picks first in odd rounds picks last in even rounds). That way, (1) ELO has no purpose and therefore manipulation doesn't arise unless captains don't know the players and just go by ELO, (2) captains can still try to get their friends on their team (possibly at the expense of passing on a better player), and (3) we can evaluate the captains' drafting ability by back-checking the actual results of the players against the draft position.

No limit on the number of teams. I may institute a preliminary round to reduce the number of teams to a factor of 4, where the lowest teams play a swift knockout match. Ideally, we might be able to coerce enough players without having to resort to this.

Regards seeding, ranking, maximising ELO for a team, etc., I understand the points made. And I don't wish to offend nor alienate those who put their thoughts to this. But...

I don't want an initial draft, because I want people to feel 'part' of their team/squad. I don't want to picked to be on someone else's team, maybe even just to make up the numbers. I want to choose* the players I want to play with. Whether it's me asking them, or they asking me, I want that choice, and I want all others to have that choice. Don't want to be part of that particular team? Fine - go ahead and join a different team, or start your own. As I said in the opening thread, I want this tournament to be about the team and everything good about being in it. IMO, a draft is more likely to cause ructions and disharmony. That being said, we could have a thread where people who want to play but have yet to find a team (like we've had in the past for transnationals in the NC) could post to express their interest, I'd have no problem with this.

I don't want elite teams. Be honest, the NC already has them. Which is fine, because that's the rules. You can join with anyone from your nation to form a team. But I think the NC works DESPITE this, rather than because of it. You play in the NC to represent your country, to show some national pride. At least, I do. Look at Finland, Italy, the UK, etc. Some good players, but not the strength in depth of other countries. And yet, despite the odds against them, they still join the NC hoping to cause some upsets. Do any of these teams really expect to win the whole thing? Don't be daft. But I want every, or at least the vast majority, of teams who form and enter this tournament to feel they stand a reasonable chance of progressing. I don't want a group of players declining the chance to play because they know they'll be seeded bottom of their league and more than likely to go out at this stage.

To me, giving a free choice* to all teams on their squad formation is important, but not at the detriment of the heart of the competition. Placing an upper limit on the combined ELO would support this ethos. I wouldn't set the limit so low as to prevent a tops team from forming, but would you want to play against a team with the tops from Germany, France, Portugal and the US? You might say yes, but you'd be in the minority, I'm sure. And I recognise that ELO can be manipulated, but how many players would theoretically throw away points to force down their ELO, just to play in this one tournament? Are people that desperate to win? Would people not enjoy the challenge of forming a team with this slight restriction?

*So my decision on choice, as in selecting your squad of four, still remains, until I am persuaded otherwise. Aggregate ELO based on best three players in a squad. This prevents a dummy fourth player to lower the overall ELO.

If anyone can recommend to me a system that I consider still to be fair, please go for it. Angel, if you're out there and you're working on something as Dea said, I'm listening. And Dea, I really want you to take part in this tournament and feel that you're playing on a fairly assembled team. Even if you don't want me on your team

I'm still up for further comments, thoughts, votes and polls. And my position is not final. It's just I'm yet to be convinced the competition will be all the better for either free choice or draft.

i think it's costy in time still if u want to prevent a super team i think that elo is not the best measure. why not ask everyone who signed in to list the players included from rank 1 till rank Last i would love to see everyone opinions - i know its 2 demanding but thats something i would like to watch and also do

If the player who voted regarding a proposed tweak for the ELO rankings would either like to post his/her idea here, or indeed PM me about it, I'd be very keen to know more

Some time between the conclusion of the NC and the Christmas holidays, I'll end the poll and consider the results. Hopefully, there'll be a consensus on most points and I'll then be able to firm up the rules.

Following that, I'll open up a thread for sign ups: either whole squads, or individuals in search of a squad. Similar to the NC, but in the inverse situation, I get the feeling that we may have to have a staggered signing up process: first round for squads with players of 4 different nationalities, then a second round for those players who've not found a squad who, despite being the same nationality, would agree to join together.

What do others think about this?

Additionally, some of you have advised me on the best timing for this tournament. Are we looking at a mid-January start?

With the NC concluded - grats to UEG - I will close the poll within the next 24hrs. If you have any interest in this tournament and wish to vote on certain aspects, please do so today. I will publish the results and my thoughts on these in this thread.

There seems to be enough interest to firm up the rules for registration and tournament play. I will do this, with the help of my friends, and start a new thread in the coming days. The earlier I start registration the better, I think.

It does not necessarily follow that I will adapt the rules to suit the majority verdicts given in the final three questions, more that I am now aware of people's feelings in these matters.

The good news is that 24 people took part in the vote, and to me, this means we have a viable tournament. Even if we only have 2 leagues. But I'm sure once people begin to sign up, others will follow. I would be great to have 4 leagues of 4 teams as a minimum.

To that end, I propose to move swiftly on the rules, posting a reviewed version in the next few days, and hope to open a signing up thread thereafter.

If you have any further comments or suggestions, now or after I produce an adapted rule set, you know where I am.

Should teams be limited in ELO rank? (23 votes)Yes - 10 votes - 43%
Yes, but I have a proposed tweak - 1 vote - 4%
No, it should be a free choice - 9 votes - 39%
No, we should use a draft system - 2 votes - 9%
No, but I have a different idea about ranking/seeding - 0 votes - 0%
Don't know - 1 vote - 4%

How should each squad be seeded? (23 votes)
US + 2P, average of all 4 players - 10 votes - 43%US + 2P, average of top 3 players - 11 votes - 48%
US + 2P, other system - 1 vote - 4%
Other - 1 vote - 4%

These two questions surely seem to tie together. If the limited ELO is not in place, then it needs to be answer b, and not all four players since 4th player could be a 1300 rank friend on team who is not really going to play. Am I right on that possibility?

Not sure if I put in for a proposed tweak, but one tweak could be to combine free choice with those of us willing to be put into a "pool of players" who then are developed into teams for balanced ELO. One question I have is are we assuming a player minimum ELO to enter that impacts the free choice perspective?
And one other tweak possibility is to allow a person when signing up for the pool to put in if there are certain players they will not serve on a team with. (for me there is only one I would hesitate to serve with, but I could even deal with that person if I needed to.)

Rules are complete (comprehensive and very long ). Thanks to those who helped prove and offered recommendations. I am about to publish these in a new thread.

ELO limitations remain in place. I took a snapshot at around lunchtime yesterday of the Top 200 2P scores and matched them with the Top 200 US scores. I will publish these soon after the rules. Players who do not appear on the ELO list may of course still register.

Registration will open tomorrow, Monday 14th December. It will have 3 phases, and close on Sunday 10th January, giving a window of 4 weeks.